ANALISA JURNAL

A. Analisa Penelitian
1. Populasi
Jumlah anggota populasi yang hanya 24 orang diambil seluruhnya menjadi sampel penelitian dengan
menggunakan teknik total sampling. Dan dari 24 sampel tersebut yang memenuhi criteria inklusi dan eksklusi
adalah 23 orang.
2. Intervention
Instrumen yang digunakan adalah kuesioner, untuk mengukur tingkat stres kerja pada perawat IGD sebelum dan
sesudah dilakukan terapi musik (pre-post test). Terapi musik dilakukan sebanyak 1x, selama 15 menit dengan
menggunakan beberapa musik klasik jenis Mozart yang dipilih sendiri.
3. Compare
Dalam jurnal peneltian, peneliti tidak menggunakan kelompok kontrol akan tetapi satu kelompok di beri
intervensi.
4. Output
Terdapat perbedaan antara stres kerja perawat sebelum dan setelah dilakukan terapi musik klasik, dengan nilai
rata-rata sebelum dilakukan terapi musik klasik sebesar 2,52 dan SD = 0,511 dan nilai rata-rata setelah
dilakukan terapi musik klasik sebesar 2,17 dan SD = 0,388. Dengan nilai p = 0,002 pada signifikan = 0,05.
Kesimpulan : Terapi musik klasik efektif dalam menurnkan stres kerja pada perawat di ruang IGD RSUD Dr. R.
Goetheng Taroenadibrata Purbalingga dengan effect size= 2,01.
B. Critikal Apraisal For Quantitative Research
1. Judul dan Abstract
Judul jurnal sesuai dengan isi ( Efektifitas terapi musik klasik terhadap penurunan
Stres kerja perawat igd di rsud dr. R. Goetheng Taroenadibrata purbalingga tahun 2013).
a. Tujuan dalam jurnal disebutkan, yaitu tujuan umum dan tujuan khusus. (Tujuan umum : untuk mengetahui
efektifitas terapi musik terhadap penurunan stres kerja perawat IGD di RSUD Dr. R. Goetheng Taroenadibrata
Purbalingga tahun 2013, tujuan khusus: ntuk mengungkapkan hubungan sebab akibat setelah terapi musik
terhadap penurunan stress kerja pada perawat dengan melibatkan satu kelompok subjek)
b. Abstrak memberikan informasi yang lengkap yaitu latar belakang, tujuan, metode dan hasil.
2. Justifikasi, Metode dan desain
a. Di dalam jurnal pada latar belakang dijelaskan alasan melakukan penelitian.
b. Tinjauan pustaka dalam jurnal cukup.
c. Di dalam jurnal menggunakan referensi terbaru 5 tahun terakhir tetapi masih ada yang menggunakan
referensi yang lebih dari 5 tahun terakhir.
d. Hipotesis dalam penelitian ini tidak dicantumkan.
e. Penelitian pre-eksperimen dengan rancangan penelitian one group pre-post test design
3. Sampling
Pengambilan populasi dijelaskan dalam penelitian ini yaitu teknik total sampling. Dan dari 24 sampel tersebut
yang memenuhi kriteria inklusi dan eksklusi adalah 23 orang. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah kuesioner,
untuk mengukur tingkat stres kerja pada perawat IGD sebelum dan sesudah dilakukan terapi musik (pre-post
test). Terapi musik dilakukan sebanyak 1x, selama 15 menit dengan menggunakan beberapa musik klasik jenis
Mozart yang dipilih sendiri
a. Kriteria inklusi dan eksklusi tidak disebutkan dalam jurnal.
b. Ukuran sampel cukup berdasarkan teori yang mendukung penelitian ini. Terdapat kriteria jenis kelamin, usia,
tingkat pendidikan, dan lama kerja
4. Pengumpulan data
Cara pengumpulan data dalam jurnal dijelaskan yaitu pengumpulan data dijelaskan dengan mengukur tingkat
stres perawat IGD terdiri dari 2 kategori yaitu stres menengah, stres tinggi. melalui pre test didapatkan jumlah
perawat tertentu yang mengalami tingakat stres tertentu, selanjutnya diberikan terapi music klasik. Setelah
diberikan intervensi music klasik selama Terapi musik dilakukan sebanyak 1x, selama 15 menit dengan
menggunakan beberapa musik klasik jenis Mozart yang dipilih sendiri dilakukan pos test untuk mengetahui
perubahan tingkat stres perawat.
Instrumen pengumpulan data dalam jurnal tidak jelaskan.

a. Uji instrumen dalam jurnal tidak dijelaskan.

b. Di dalam jurnal tidak dijelaskan confounding factors.
c. Di dalam jurnal tidak dijelaskan tentang validitas dan reliabilitas instrumen
5. Pertimbangan Etik
a. Ethical approval dari komite etik di dalam jurnal tidak dijelaskan.
b. Tidak dijelaskan dalam jurnal tentang informed consent.
6. Analisa data dan hasil
a. Hasil penelitian disampaikan dengan jelas dalam jurnal.
b. P-value dan confidence interval dilaporkan dalm jurnal, yaitu p-value: 0,05. (nilai rata-rata sebelum
dilakukan terapi musik klasik sebesar 2,52 dan SD= 0,511 dan nilai rata-rata sesudah dilakukan terapi musik
klasik sebesar 2,17 dan SD= 0,388. Dengan nilai p= 0,002).
c. Hasil penelitian dalam jurnal signifikan, Berdasarkan hasil analisis efektifitas terapi musik klasik terhadap
penurunan stress kerja perawat IGD RSUD Dr. R. Goetheng Taroenadibrata Purbalingga menggunakan uji
paired t-test. Diperoleh nilai p = 0,002 yang lebih kecil dari nilai = 0,05, sehingga Ha diterima dan H0 ditolak.
Hasil tersebut menunjukkan bahwa ada perbedaan yang signifikan antara stres kerja sebelum dan sesudah
dilakukan terapi musik klasik.
d. Kesimpulan dalam penelitian ini adalah Terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan antara stres kerja perawat
sebelum dan sesudah dilakukan terapi musik klasik, Terapi musik klasik efektif dalam menurunkan stres kerja
perawat di ruang IGD RSUD Dr. R. Goetheng Taroenadibrata Pubalingga.
7. Hasil dan Keterbatasan Penelitian
a. Hasil pada penelitian dapat digeneralisasikan pada perawat IGD
b. Keterbatasan dalam penelitian ini tidak disebutkan
c. Dalam jurnal tidak dijelaskan tentang saran penelitian selanjutnya.
d. Implikasi dalam penelitian ini adalah adanya terapi musik klasik untuk perawat IGD membantu menurunkan
stres kerja dan terapi musik ini dapat diterapkan di rumah sakit khususnya di ruang IGD.
C. Hubungan hasil penelitian dengan kondisi riil di klinis atau di lapangan
Penggunaan terapi musik klasik sesuai belum diterapkan di rumah sakit panembahan senopati bantul.
D. Kelebihan jurnal
1. Penelitian memberikan intervensi pada responden dan hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa adanya hubungan
yang bermakna antara terapi musik klasik dengan penurunan tingkat stres kerja.
2. Metode penelitian diuraikan cukup jelas yaitu sampel, tempat penelitian, dan teknik intervensi.
3. Tujuan penelitian diuraikan dengan jelas yaitu tujuan umum dan tujuan khusus.
E. Kekurangan jurnal
1. Manfaat jurnal tidak dicantumkan.
2. Kriteria inklusi dan eksklusi tidak dijelaskan.
3. Penelitian ini tidak mencantumkan instrumen yang jelas untuk pengukuran tingkat depresi.
4. Confounding faktor tidak dijelaskan dalam jurnal.
F. Perbandingan Isi Jurnal
1. Aplikasi pada kasus presentasi
Terapi musik popular telah diaplikasikan pada pasien kasus kelolaan, dimana terapi musik sesuai dengan jadwal
yang ada di RSJD Surakarta.
2. Perbandingan isi jurnal dengan penelitian lain (metode, tempat) terkait kasus
Jurnal lain : Hubungan jam kerja perawat dengan stres kerja perawat igd rspad gatot soebroto ditkesad
jakarta.
Peneliti : Tiur Marsaulina Gultom.
Tujuan : Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui hubungan antara jam kerja perawat dengan stres kerja
perawat IGD di RSPAD Gatot Soebroto Ditkesad Jakarta.
Metode : Penelitian ini menggunakan desain deskriptif korelasional dengan metode cross sectional. Besar
sampel 37 responden dengan rumus slovin. Analisa ini mengunakan uji Chi- Square
Hasil : Hasil analisa pada penelitian ini menunjukan 23 responden menyatakan jam kerja tidak normal,
diketahui 18 responden (78.3%) stress kerja berat dan 5 responden (21.7%) stress kerja ringan Sedangkan dari
14 responden yang menyatakan jam kerja normal, diketahui 2 responden (14.3%) stress kerja berat dan 12

responden (85.7%) stress kerja ringan. Hasil menunjukkan jam kerja perawat berhubungan nyata dengan stress
kerja perawat P Value 0.001 < Alpha (0.05).
3. Perbandingan dengan teori yang sudah ada di teksbook terkait kasus
Hasil penelitian sebelumya yang dilakukan Mark et al. (2011) yang menyimpulkan bahwa tuntutan pekerjaan
berpengaruh terhadap kejadian stres dan depresi. Kemudian menurut hasil penelitian Shively et al.(2011)
menyatakan bahwa semakin tinggi jumlah pasien yang ditangani (beban kerja) maka semakin tinggi pula tingkat
stres yang dialami oleh perawat.
Terapi musik mempengaruhi tingkat depresi tingkat depresi karena musik bersifat terapeutik. Penelitian
sebelumya yang dilakukan oleh Rahmawati (2008) telah membuktikan bahwa terdapat perbedaan tingkat stres
sebelum dan sesudah terapi musik pada kelompok remaja. Pengaruh beberapa macam frekkuensi, nada, dan
getaran tertentu terhadap fisik tubuh dari aliran musik yang sesuai serta pengetahuan akan musik dapat
digunakan untuk mengusir kesedihan dan depresi.
BAB V
KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN
A. Kesimpulan
1. Responden sebagian besar berjenis kelamin laki-laki yaitu sebanyak 56,5%, berpendidikan DIII 69,6%,
berusia > 30 tahun 78,3%, dan lama kerja antara 5-10 tahun yaitu 39,1%.
2. Stres kerja perawat sebelum dilakukan terapi musik klasik yang termasuk dalam kategori stres menengah
47,8% dan yang termasuk kategori stres tinggi 52,2%.
3. Stres kerja perawat sesudah dilakukan terapi musik klasik yang termasuk dalam kategori stres menengah
82,6% dan stres tinggi 17,4%.
4. Terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan antara stres kerja perawat sebelum dan sesudah dilakukan terapi musik
klasik, dengan nilai rata-rata sebelum dilakukan terapi musik klasik sebesar 2,52 dan SD= 0,511 dan nilai ratarata sesudah dilakukan terapi musik klasik sebesar 2,17 dan SD= 0,388. Dengan nilai p= 0,002 5. Terapi musik
klasik efektif dalam menurunkan stres kerja perawat di ruang IGD RSUD Dr. R. Goetheng Taroenadibrata
Pubalingga. Dengan nilai effect size sebesar 2,01.
B. Saran
1. Bagi pelayanan keperawatan
Dari hasil penelitian diharapkan terapi musik klasik dapat diterapkan pihak rumah sakit dan perawat sebagai
salah satu terapi modalitas bagi pasien dengan tingkat kecemasan yang tinggi dan pasien yang lama menunggu
di ruang IGD untuk mendapat pelayanan karna adanya prosedur Triase.
2. Bagi institusi pendidikan
Disarankan bagi institusi pendidikan sebagai sarana memberikan kontribusi pengetahuan mengenai manfaat
terapi musik dalam ilmu keperawatan sehingga dapat dikembangkan, dan diaplikasikan dimasa yang akan
datang.

Journal club presentations provide a forum through which hematology trainees keep abreast of new
developments in hematology and engage in informal discussion and interaction. Furthermore, honing
presentation skills and mastering the ability to critically appraise the evidence add to our armamentarium as
clinicians. Outlined here is a systematic approach to preparing a journal club presentation, with emphasis on key
elements of the talk and references for electronic resources. Use of these tools and techniques will contribute to
the success of your presentation.
I. ARTICLE SELECTION:
The foundation of an outstanding journal club presentation rests on the choice of an interesting and well-written
paper for discussion. Several resources are available to help you select important and timely research, including
the American College of Physicians (ACP) Journal Club and the Diffusion section of The Hematologist.
McMaster University has created the McMaster Online Rating of Evidence (MORE) system to identify the
highest-quality published research. In fact, the ACP Journal Club uses the MORE system to select their articles1.
Specific inclusion criteria have been delineated in order to distinguish papers with the highest scientific merit2.
Articles that have passed this screening are then rated by clinicians on their clinical relevance and
newsworthiness, using a graded scale3. With the help of your mentors and colleagues, you can use these criteria
and the rating scale as informal guidelines to ensure that your chosen article merits presentation.
II. ARTICLE PRESENTATION:

Study Background: This section provides your audience with the necessary information and context for
a thoughtful and critical evaluation of the article's significance. The goals are 1) to describe the rationale
for and clinical relevance of the study question, and 2) to highlight the preclinical and clinical research
that led to the current trial. Review the papers referenced in the study's "Background" section as well as
previous work by the study's authors. It also may be helpful to discuss data supporting the current
standard of care against which the study intervention is being measured.

Study Methodology and Results: Clearly describe the study population, including inclusion/exclusion
criteria. A diagrammatic schema is easy to construct using PowerPoint software and will help to clearly
illustrate treatment arms in complex trials. Explain the statistical methods, obtaining assistance from a
statistician if needed. Take this opportunity to verbally and graphically highlight key results from the
study, with plans to expand on their significance later in your presentation.

Author's Discussion: Present the authors' conclusions and their perspective on the study results,
including explanations of inconsistent or unexpected results. Consider whether the conclusions drawn
are supported by the data presented.

III. ARTICLE CRITIQUE:

This component of your presentation will define the success of your journal club. A useful and widely accepted
approach to this analysis has been published in JAMA's series "User's guide to the medical literature." The
Centre for Health Evidence in Canada has made the complete full-text set of these user's guides available
online4. This site offers review guidelines for a menu of article types, and it is an excellent, comprehensive
resource to focus your study critique. A practical, user-friendly approach to literature evaluation that includes a
worksheet is also available on the ASH Web site for your use5.
While a comprehensive discussion of scientific literature appraisal is beyond the scope of this discussion,
several helpful tips warrant mention here. In assessing the validity of the study, it is important to assess for
potential sources of bias, including the funding sources and authors' affiliations. It is also helpful to look for
accompanying editorial commentary, which can provide a unique perspective on the article and highlight

controversial issues. You should plan to discuss the trade-offs between potential benefits of the study
intervention versus potential risks and the cost. By utilizing the concept of number needed to treat (NNT), one
can assess the true impact of the study intervention on clinical practice. Furthermore, by incorporating the
incidence rates of clinically significant toxicities with the financial costs into the NNT, you can generate a rather
sophisticated analysis of the study's impact on practice.
IV. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS:
Restate the authors' take-home message followed by your own interpretation of the study. Provide a personal
perspective, detailing why you find this paper interesting or important. Then, look forward and use this
opportunity to "think outside the box." Do you envision these study results changing the landscape of clinical
practice or redirecting research in this field? If so, how? In articles about therapy, future directions may include
moving the therapy up to first-line setting, assessing the drug in combination regimens or other disease states, or
developing same-class novel compounds in the pipeline. Searching for related clinical trials on the NIH Web
site6 can prove helpful, as can consultation with an expert in this field.
Good journal club discussions are integral to the educational experience of hematology trainees. Following the
above approach, while utilizing the resources available, will lay the groundwork for an outstanding
presentation.
Read the article(s) carefully. As you read the article(s) use the following questions to help you understand how
and why the research was carried out.

What is the author's central purpose? Look at INTRODUCTION.

What methods were used to accomplish this purpose (systematic recording of

observations, analysis and evaluation of published research, assessment of theory)? Look
at METHODS.
What were the techniques used? and how was each technique performed?
What kind of data can be obtained using each technique?
How are such data interpreted?
What kind of information is produced by using the technique?

What objective evidence was obtained from the author's eorts (observations,
measurements etc.)? What were the results of the study? Look at RESULTS.
How was each technique used to obtain each result?
What statistical tests were used to evaluate the signicance of the conclusions based on
numeric or graphic data?
How did each result contribute to answering the question or testing the hypothesis raised
in the introduction?

How were the results interpreted? How were they related to the original problem (author's
view of evidence rather than objective ndings)? Look at DISCUSSION.
Were the author(s) able to answer the question (test the hypothesis) raised?
Did the research provide new factual information, a new understanding of a phenomenon
in the eld, a new research technique?
How was the signicance of the work described?
Did the reported observations/interpretations support or refute observations or
interpretations made by other researchers?

(Adapted with permission of Professor Susan Lollis, Family Relations and Applied Nutrition, University of
Guelph. Source of questions in each section Wood, 2003)

4. Establish the Research Context

Once you are reasonably familiar with the article, it is important to gain an understanding of the research
context, both societal and intellectual. To establish the research context, questions such as the following should
be addressed:

Who conducted the research? What were/are their interests?

When and where was the research conducted?

Why did they do this research?

Was this research pertinent only within the authors' geographic locale, or did it have
broader (even global) relevance?

Were many other laboratories pursuing related research when the reported work was
done? If so, why?

For experimental research, what funding sources met the costs of the research?

Was the selection of the research topic inuenced by the source of research funding?

On what prior observations was the research based? What was and was not known at the
time?

How important was the research question posed by the researcher?

For more detailed information on how to answer these questions, see Labs 4 and 5 (Wood, 2003).
5. Evaluate the Text

After you have read the article and answered the questions in the previous section, you should have a good
understanding of the research undertaken. You can now begin to evaluate the author's research. Making
judgements about someone else's work is often the most dicult part of writing the review. Many students feel
that, because they are new to a discipline, they do not have enough knowledge to make judgements of other
people's work.
The following checklist may assist you:
INTRODUCTION

Read the statement of purpose at the end of the introduction. What was the objective of
the study?

Consider the title. Does it precisely state the subject of the paper?

Read the statement of purpose in the abstract. Does it match the one in the introduction?

Check the sequence of statements in the introduction. Does all the information lead
coherently to the purpose of the study?

METHODS

Review all methods in relation to the objective(s) of the study. Are the methods valid for
studying the problem?

Check the methods for essential information. Could the study be duplicated from the
methods and information given?

Check the methods for aws. Is the sample selection adequate? Is the experimental design
sound?

Check the sequence of statements in the methods. Does all the information belong there?
Is the sequence of methods clear and pertinent?

RESULTS

Examine carefully the data as presented in the tables and diagrams. Does the title or
legend accurately describe the content? Are column headings and labels accurate? Are the
data organized for ready comparison and interpretation? (A table should be selfexplanatory, with a title that accurately and concisely describes content and column
headings that accurately describe information in the cells.)

Review the results as presented in the text while referring to the data in the tables and
diagrams. Does the text complement, and not simple repeat, data? Are there
discrepancies between the results in the text and those in the tables?

Check all calculations and presentation of data.

Review the results in light of the stated objectives. Does the study reveal what the
researcher intended?

DISCUSSION

Check the interpretation against the results. Does the discussion merely repeat the
results? Does the interpretation arise logically from the data or is it too far-fetched? Have
the faults/aws/shortcomings of the research been addressed?

Is the interpretation supported by other research cited in the study?

Does the study consider key studies in the eld?

Are there other research possibilities/directions suggested?

OVERVIEW

Reread the abstract. Does it accurately summarize the article?

Check the structure of the article (rst headings and then paragraphing). Is all the material
organized under the appropriate headings? Are sections divided logically into subsections
or paragraphs?

Are stylistic concerns, logic, clarity and economy of expression addressed?

(adapted from Kuyper, 1991)

6. Establish the Signicance of the Research

Finally, it is important to establish whether the research has been successful has it led to new questions being
asked, new ways of using existing knowledge? Are other researchers citing this paper?
The following questions should be answered:

How did other researchers view the signicance of the research reported by your authors?

Did the research reported in your article result in the formulation of new questions or
hypotheses (by the authors, by other researchers)?

Have other researchers subsequently supported or refuted the

observations/interpretations of these authors?

Did the research make a signicant contribution to human knowledge?

Did the research produce any practical applications?

What are the social, political, technological, medical implications of this research?

How do you evaluate the signicance of the research?

To answer these questions look at review articles to nd out how reviewers see this piece of research. Look at
research articles to see how other people have used this work; what range of journals have cited this article? For
more detailed information on how to answer these questions, see Lab. 8 (Wood, 2003).

B. Writing your Critique

Two possible approaches
You have completed your analysis and evaluation of the journal article. How do you then put all this
information together? If your instructor has not provided a format for your critique, there are two possible ways
you might present it.
Approach (A)

If your instructor is concerned that that the article be clearly situated within the social and intellectual research
context, then you might present it in the following way:
Introduction

In the introduction, cite the journal article in full and then provide the background to this piece of research,
establishing its place within the eld. Use the answers to the questions in Establish the Research Context to
develop this section.

Body

Follow the structure of the journal article. Evaluate each section of the article Introduction, Methods,
Results, Discussion highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each section. Use the answers to the
questions in Evaluate the Text to develop this section.
Conclusion

In this section, sum up the strengths and weaknesses of the research as a whole. Establish its practical and
theoretical signicance. Use the answers to questions Establish the Signicance of the Research to develop this
section.
Approach (B)

Another common way to structure a journal article critique is the following:

Introduction

In the introduction, cite the journal article in full and provide a summary of the journal article. Use the answers
to the questions in the section Analyze the Text to develop the summary.
Body

Follow the structure of the journal article. Evaluate each section of the article Introduction, Methods, Results,
Discussion highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each section. Use the answers to the questions in
Evaluate the Text to develop this section.
Conclusion

In this section, sum up the strengths and weaknesses of the research as a whole. Establish its practical and
theoretical signicance. Use the answers to questions Establish the Signicance of the Research to develop this
section.